How important is Richard Armitage’s body?

This question has been chasing itself around my mind for a while now, as a part of something else I’m wondering about, so I thought I’d ask:

How important is Richard Armitage’s body to your perception of him?

(Please don’t worry about any answer — if it’s incredibly important to your perception of him or not at all important, I’m interested in hearing whatever you think about it. Objectification and total body denial and everything in between all welcome. I’m not looking for any particular answer at all, just curious.)

Richard Armitage becoming the Red Dragon, from the preview trailer for season 3 of Hannibal. Source: Fangoria

~ by Servetus on May 29, 2017.

107 Responses to “How important is Richard Armitage’s body?”

  1. His eyes were the first thing that got my attention. Then it was his voice. I am a sucker for a guy with who is tall with dark hair and slender build. He has changed his build with various roles and I’ve enjoyed the transformations.

  2. Ein OdB im klassischen Sinne besteht für mich zu einem wesentlichen Teil aus seiner physischen Präsenz. Ich möchte meine Fantasie begfügelt sehen und das Kopfkino zum Flimmern bringen. Und dazu gehört für mich der Körper zu 100% als Schwungmasse dazu.
    Idealerweise vereint mein persönliches OdB noch mehr, nämlich Können, Stimme und so, denn ich lege Wert auf qualitativ hochwertiges Fangirlen 😂 An dieser Stelle bin ich der “ganzheitliche” Typ 😊

    • LOL – ich liebe es, wie du dich ausdrückst… Nun bleibt nur noch die Gretchenfrage: Erfüllt Herr A. denn immer noch diese immerhin anspruchsvollen Voraussetzungen?

      • Erstens:,Freut mich, danke 😀
        Zweitens: Grundsätzlich schon, gerate bloß derzeit etwas aus der Übung, da es mir am entsprechenden “Futter” fehlt. Fühle gerade keine Notwendigkeit “olle Kamellen” aufzuwärmen und brauche dringend Frischfleisch. Quasi 😂

        • There’s definitely a sense in which the body is important as the source of attention, so to speak.

  3. 🤔 I think I could well live with his voice alone. I like how he looks…but It’s not essential. My Kopfkino is also well triggered by his voice…

  4. //

  5. Falling for him as Thornton, it was the face, eyes, hair, voice, character, all rolled into one. So, while nice, I’d like to say RA’s body is not all that important to my perception. Although the height is nice. The only thing is, there must be some importance for me because when he got really skinny, I was taken aback.

    • well, it’s hard to talk about a person, period, without talking about his body (even in absence)

  6. I can’t separate him from his body 😉 He’s very well built and his body is important part of his image for me. Yes. Also I always pay attention to the men’s hands and he has beautiful hands.

  7. His intelligence and voice during interviews really caught my attention, but i cannot deny that his body is beautiful. What a build. So whilst I would say his body is not important at all in my perception of him (particularly as I don’t often see it), it is a significant part of the overall package.

  8. Face (obviously eyes and mouth, but also the planes of his face), voice and height are important for me. Overall body not so much though I much prefer him slim. Muscles just don’t do anything for me.

  9. I’m not going to lie, I do find his body extremely attractive especially his shoulders. After all he works hard to maintain his physique, but like so many that have commented here, that isn’t the spark that made me think wow. However, as to whether it’s important to me I guess that depends on what specifically you are referring to. If it’s his height, his raw power, the sheer physicality of him then yes. If it’s his toned torso or honed limbs then no. It is the height and solid strength of him, his presence, his protective yet nurturing aura that is important. It would not matter to me if he were skinny or ‘a fat dude’, as long as he was happy and healthy.

    • One of the reasons I asked this question was that I figured there were subgroups — i.e., his appearance, his movement, the way he “inhabits his body” (presence) — but I was not sure how many.

  10. His body is a bonus as far as I’m concerned. It’s those eyes (that I’d gladly drown in) & that voice that do it for me.

    • I’m wondering if you are into the audiobooks?

      • Oh yes! I have several of his from Audible as well as the first 3 episodes from Robin Hood that he narrated. But I must confess that I tend to get so caught up in listening to his voice that I really don’t pay attention to the plot. As someone once said, “he could read the phone book and I’d listen.”

  11. For me it will always be his approach, his way of moving, of conquering space. This is the legacy of dance training. For that, the silhouette, the musculature, the physical appearance, the pace count a lot and contribute to create a singular, striking presence which inescapably attracts the eye, causes one to turn away and remain the look taped. More than muscles and plastic, some displacement will remain forever in my visual memory.
    Besides, the mimicry of his face and his movements are constants that are constantly found, through the various films. They define him.

    • so is there a difference between movement and presence or are they the same thing?

      • Le mouvement désigne l’ensemble des gestes, des déplacements du corps entier, leurs changements de position dans l’espace.
        On tire du mot mouvement le verbe “se mouvoir”. (la conjugaison fait rire les enfants: je me meus, je me mus, en France la vache meugle, elle dit ” meuh”. 🙂
        La présence d’une personne:
        ( * au sens propre désigne le fait d’être là physiquement présent,
        hors sujet ici)

        au sens figuré désigne la capacité à capter l’attention, l’aura: “Qualité d’un acteur qui, par son talent, s’impose au public, qualité de quelqu’un dont la personnalité exerce un puissant attrait, un rayonnement” selon le dictionnaire Larousse.

        • I feel like either there’s some overlap or one is a subset of the other.

          • Pour moi ce sont deux termes sans relation, deux notions indépendantes, différentes.
            La présence et la prestance sont des termes dont la signification se rapprochent. Mais il n’ai pas besoin de bouger de faire des mouvements des déplacements, pour faire preuve de prestance, de présence. Sans bouger une personne peut impressionner, grâce seulement à sa façon d’être imposant, magnétique, par son regard, par son positionnement fixe dans l’espace (cf video dans le luxueux hôtel de NY).
            Mais je vous accorde que dans le mouvement Richard fait passer beaucoup de présence de prestance. C’était mon propos initial.
            Je pense toujours à sa démarche lourde, chaloupée, où sa hauteur, la longueur de ses jambes semblent un handicap. Il ressemble à un albatros cloué au sol, soumis aux affres de sa réflexion.
            Alors que dans le maniement des armes, ou quand son humeur est légère, il est souple, virevoltant. Les exemples sont si nombreux…

            • I agree there can be presence without movement (that might be when we notice it most), but I don’t think there can be movement without presence.

              • For him YES but for anybody NO, not every time not often. It ‘s a question of poise. For example I consider me as a gnome, in front of someone like him. Hope I explain it well.

  12. What first attracted my attention was from the shoulders up. Dark hair, soulful blue eyes and and that voice! What completely engaged me was his brain which revealed his intelligence, creativity, humor, humility and kindness. Yes, he has an attractive body but that is not the quality of his that moves me.

    • Oh, no question he has a brain — but what I was interested in here was the body specifically.

  13. His eyes and face got my attention, but his height and lush hair are very important to me. A certified ❤ throb for me has to be over six feet tall, no exceptions. His teeth are a little too perfect, but good dental work is also a must have. He really checks all the boxes for me. I wish he would keep his Porter physique, but his lean look is ok. I never cared about a guy’s thighs or caboose before RA, and in general, they are something I don’t notice in any other man but him. I guess you could say my appreciation of the male form beyond classic statuary was awoken by intensive RA study.

    • I have the same reaction re: undercarriage — I never really looked before. Although I do now!

  14. Difficult question. I’m definitely not partial to objectification, but I cannot completely free myself from certain physical ‘attractions’ – mainly the eyes, and the slender, athletic build.
    This said, I would never have stayed interested in RA and his career had he been only a pretty face and no substance.
    The first role I saw him in was Guy – no attraction there, however good-looking. Also, I soon grew tired of the series (sorry). Then along came Strike Back, and at the time I taught at the police school where many veterans found themselves after service, and I recommended they see this series for English purposes 🙂 Anyhow, my first reaction to SB was: “Hey, this is Guy of Gisborne who can be nice and smile”. So, I became fascinated with this actor who could act so well that I would totally buy he was either a psychopath with an unhealthy penchant for a stubborn young woman or a sympathetic, family man who was battling guilt and being a hero while coming to terms with his own flaws. And then I looked up the name of said actor:-)
    The body is the initial attraction, but it’s the personal ‘substance’ that pulls the weight.

  15. I saw your post early this morning but deliberately waited with my comment to let the thought simmer a bit. How important is the body? I think I would be lying if I said that aesthetics didn’t count. And yet, it wasn’t RA’s body that caught my attention. The first time I saw him (in NS), I wasn’t immediately blown away. I think it was his voice that blew me away, and his eyes, when I saw him the second time and recognised ‘Mr Thornton’. However, then it was a rather quick road down Objectification Lane… Head, shoulders, knees and toes, knees and toes…
    So it’s safe to say that ‘the bod’ is at least half the story (the other half comprised of talent and personality). But then I am actually not particularly choosy what his body shape is – whether he is all bulked up like Porter, or wispy like season 7 Lucas North – I just like the general shape of him, and I like his face. Extremely handsome, but not a pretty-pretty man.

    • Yes, no pretty-pretty face. That would be boring! It’s important to have some angles and edges to hold on my attention. 😁

      • That’s exactly it. Something to wonder about, a bit of mystery. The face of evil 😂

      • I definitely agree.

        • Kennst du das? Man sieht einen Schauspieler das erste Mal im Film, denkt, ja, geht so (optisch) und nach einer halben Stunde ist man hin und weg, und überzeugt, dass er hochattraktiv ist, OBWOHL er wahrlich nicht in jeder Einstellung gut aussieht. Ist halt schon die Summe der Eigenschaften. Ich mag das, wenn es mir passiert 😊

          • Sehr schön ausgedrückt!!!! Das kann ich vollumfänglich unterschreiben!

          • Das Gesamtpaket muss stimmen. Ein reiner Schönling wird leicht langweilig. Gerade wenn es da einige Ecken und Kanten gibt wird die Person interessant.

    • I had a similar reaction to you — I caught the bug in N&S but i don’t think because of his looks.

  16. Initially his physique was very important. I wasn’t attracted to Thornton or series 7 Lucas but lusted after Guy, Series 8 Lucas and ( my all time favourite bod) Porter. His height ( which obviously hasn’t changed) is also part of it – John Standring towered over everyone else in Sparkhouse and I found this gentle shy man enormously attractive and could never understand what Carol saw in the weedy neighbour when she had an Adonis in the yard. However, it isn’t simply his size that matters but how he uses it 😊 The way he moves is so beautiful – especially in fight scenes which show off his dance training. There is something very attractive about a big man who moves so purposefully and elegantly. And the combination of strength and kindness that that is the ‘real’ RA of my tulpa is a winner for me. I think I’m the first one to actually vocalise it on this thread but, bottom line, I suspect he would be very good in bed!

    If I could get over the violence I would probably find much to admire in Hannibal too.

    • well, good in bed is definitely an appeal factor! 🙂

      OK, so decisive: combination of elegant movement and some kind of gentleness?

      • Yes – but also strength and a sense of purpose in his movement.

        Elegance and kindness alone could be quite fey but there is a sense of confidence and mastery in his movement that is attractive to me. To paraphrase William Morris – he looks like he is both beautiful and useful.

  17. This is a really difficult question to answer. I’ve been thinking about it for hours, and I still don’t know the answer. What was the thing that first struck me when I saw Gisborne? Why was he the sexiest man I’d ever seen. It was so long ago, that I can’t be sure. I know it was his nose, hair, eyes, and voice. It was also his height, and the way he moved his body. Beyond that, it was his tiny movements of his facial muscles, eyes, or tilt of his head. So, I guess that it wasn’t initially his body per se, since I didn’t see any of it uncovered in the beginning. It was his overall sense and ownership of his body, the confidence he exuded, his overwhelming size, and power.

    Discovering who he was, his humor, his dedication to research for a character, his work ethic, compassion, and more endeared him to me.

    Over time, as he has aged or altered for different parts, I have preferred some looks to others, but haven’t been turned off by any of them. I think as he continues to age, and it starts to catch up with him, I will be able to adapt to nature. I think I will because of all the other aspects of his whole being.

    I catch my breath, and my heart skips a beat when I see certain pictures, or Gifs of him. His beauty, strength, grace, and presence astounds me. His body is very important to me, but it isn’t the only part of him that is important to me.

  18. I believe I read some were upset when he commented during the ’60 seconds with interview’ that he “didn’t want to be the fat dude”. But, I am going to answer honestly – I don’t want him to be the fat dude either. Or a short dude. Although everything about him combines to make me love RA (looks, sense of humour, he sounds interesting to talk to, lovely eyes, lovely hair, lovely voice, lovely hands, tolerant, interested in the world, good work ethic, etc. etc.) a big part of that package as my fantasy perfect man crush is that he is tall and fit. I would still really really like him if he were chubby and short – but he in that case wouldn’t be my ‘perfect man’ crush.

    • Although afer reading the comments of Evie Art and Squirrel0072 – what they wrote about his physicality and movement is the real point of his particular physique that I really am drawn to.

  19. Após algumas fotos traseiras de RA de jeans… Seu corpo é tudo 😉

  20. Voice, mouth, height, nose, shoulders, in that order. 😉

  21. I really like the comments of Evie, Squirrel and Kathy – actually this is a topic we can all really build sisterhood around! 😀

    I’m trying to answer exactly the question you asked, which is how important his body is to my perception of him. I decided to try the percentage route 🙂

    – Raw expressive power and presence: 60%
    which is tied to his voice, face and body/physicality- fairly even split 20/20/20
    – Mind/personality: 40%, probably split evenly between the two 20/20 –
    as much as we can really know of either of these.

    There’s actually overlap between those two areas though, of course, as clearly I’m fascinated by the decisions he makes about how to express his roles, which his inner man directs and controls. I also strongly associate him with both sweetness and mystery, as far as his personality, “moody actor” notwithstanding. So actually his mind & personality create about half the impression for me, but his expressive power, for which his being- body, face and glorious voice- are the instrument, even more so (at least 60%). That final 110% really expresses how he is more than the sum of his parts to me. I don’t know how to separate the power and attraction of his art and expressiveness from his body, face and voice. If any one of them was ever altered, I think the artistry inside him would create a path around it…. you know, how they say with a blocked blood vessel sometimes the body creates a new set of capillaries around it? 😀 The gift is too strong within him! (Sorry, I sound like Yoda…)

    I think this is a different question than how big a part does his body play in his attractiveness to me….. that answer would be, it’s not essential and wasn’t my major first impression- yet still inseparable from who he is. I think that’s where many of us are coming down on the question. A truly fantastic question too! Cheers!

    • This is beautiful writing; however, I agree that body and mind are not separate (or talent and appearance) in the whole picture — but I was specifically interested in the impression the body makes.

      • It’s interesting to see how we answer, or try to…. I’d have to admit too, like Kathy, that I’m (cough) more aware of his body now than when I was a new fan. Hannibal, numerous pics & rather perceptive companions, I suppose 😎 (that’s my story & I’m sticking to it 😂)

    • 🙂 thank you to understand my bad English and French languages.

  22. Not so much your question, but the way we all struggle to define what it is about Richard that “gets” us, reminds me of another hypothetical question I once asked some fellow Richard friends:

    If an evil genie came and told you that you had to choose, from now on, either to see Richard OR to hear Richard – one or the other, NOT both – which would you choose?

    (The consensus was, they hated me for asking the question 😀 But I think it speaks to some similar issues….)

    • that gets at some of what was in my mind when I asked, e.g., if the voice is more important to those who love the audiobooks (for instance)

      • It’s very difficult with him, because his voice is unique & compelling by itself, as the audiobooks, but he can also be an expert nonverbal communicator. I’m thinking specifically of Hannibal, where he was virtually silent his first episode yet conveyed so much. I think this is probably a way he likes to stretch himself professionally.

  23. what attracted me to Mr. Richard Armitage was his eyes. it was from a photo of him playing Thorin. there was so many emotions going on in Thorin’s eyes. i have seen lots of photos, movies, t.v. shows, and interviews, etc. of Mr. Richard Armitage in character and not in character, and his eyes show a lot of emotions. i know some people would say they see only one emotion maybe two. but, i see a lot of emotions (haunting, sexiness/ravage, sadness, anger, craziness/madness, happy, etc.) and this shows me how very talented he is as an artist/actor and human being.

  24. His looks are a major part of his attraction for me. He has incredibly masculine facial features which I find very appealing: strong jawline; chiselled cheekbones; come-to-bed-with-me blue eyes; elegant aquiline nose (pre-nose job – I don’t care for his new nose – too pointy IMO).

    I like his body too despite the fact he does not have a “conventional” male model or dancer type of body: he has a thick trunk (no tapered waist) and relatively broad hips and an ample backside….I’d love to see him in ballet tights!!

    I prefer him well muscled and clean shaven a la Johns Porter and Thornton. I don’t find skinny, bearded Armitage particularly appealing. Indeed, in the last year or so, I do think he has looked more “feminine” at times but this may be due (partly) to his clothes and hair styling.

    Overall, I need him to maintain the perception of masculine virility engendered by his good looks even though I realise in his personal life the reality may be somewhat different. Poor man, it can’t be easy being a 💖throb!

    • I thought he looked less masculine last fall — but possibly because I’d become so accustomed to the beard. Kenneth was really, really cleanshaven and so thin.

      so the important part of how you perceive him for you is the masculinity / virility ….

      • After reading your comment, I thought of DDL and his two very different back to back roles. In Last of the Mohicans, he was very muscular and masculine. In his next role, The Age of Innocence, he lost that build and was very clean shaven. Gotta say I loved him as Hawkeye. I often see comparisons between DDL and RA based on their style of acting and their similar builds.

      • Absolutely! And the odd glimpses of the real man we get from time to time that keep me interested.

  25. For me, the question has three parts: how important was it then; how important is it now; and how important will it be in the future if there are major changes. ? ( I’m sticking to his physique in this answer, mostly and not his face, hair or voice)

    I needed to be physically attracted to him for this to work for me and so far, the whole package has worked. I’ve enjoyed his body in most of its shapes – lean or skinny, medium, built and bulky. It’s not a perfect body in my eyes – height and long legs is my type. There are parts of his body I don’t particular like or don’t think are perfect — his thighs, his wide rear, I wish his shoulders were broader, but together with his height, it’s always worked for me. I admire his back, shoulders and chest. I’ve loved his face, both young and now, older. I love how he uses his body. I like watching him move. I like his gestures.

    If I discovered him as, say medium looking, balding or curly haired short guy with a barrel chest – or a blonde or redhead, I never would have gotten deep in – though I might have admired his face, and of course his talent. If he’d have had a not so pleasant voice, the magic wouldn’t have been there.
    The initial, “wow, hit over the head heat” would never have happened, though I might have admired him as an actor if I knew his work. So without that body – there would have been none of this for me. The same face and voice on a different body would not have resulted in 4 years of fandom.

    Over time, he’s maintained what i like about his body and he has the remarkable ability to bring back the body that first grabbed me – which was as Lucas North ( and I think Guy of Gisborne is hot as hell). I saw that again in Love, Love, Love – especially Act I – quite remarkable, really – 16 years later

    So, ‘Ive been able to appreciate and enjoy his body no matter how it’s looked, even when it doesn’t have that long lean look I crave.

    However, if, as he aged, he became unattractive to me, I think it would matter. I’d still be curious and want to see all his fine acting, I might enjoy shots from the waist up, but no question, something would be missing for me.

    • I like the historical approach!

      The first part of this sounds like a perception of mine a few years ago — he had to be beautiful to get my attention. Also totally agree about how astounding his physique seemed last fall.

      I’m glad to see the topic broached of what would happen if he weren’t attractive, because I think the state of affairs that it’s a given that he is attractive to all of us creates a significant obstacle to answering this quesiton. It’s useful to consider the counterfactual.

  26. I agree with Perry completely. It’s the whole package that makes lightning bolt happen. For me, his height is very important. If he looked the same in his face, hair, etc but was less than six feet tall, I don’t think I’d find him as attractive. So, there is a presence about the body and the way he uses it that, combined with his very attractive face and voice, makes him stand apart from other actors who are also pleasing to the eye. I prefer him clean shaven, and I rather liked him really muscular as John Porter. I don’t particularly like the bearded/thin look for him. I was not as attracted to him around the time he finished the Crucible — he’d lost so much weight and the beard aged him and in my view it hides his lovely face. I really disliked that super short hair stage he went through around the time of Hannibal (although I recognize that’s not about his body alone).
    My favourite looks for him were as Guy, Porter, and Thornton (and the heavier Lucas in the later seasons) — but I realize that he was much younger then and don’t want to say that I don’t care for his looks now that he has aged. I think he looks good as Daniel Miller too.

    • I’m not opposed to the “total package” argument, just trying to figure out which portion of the total package is made up by one’s perception of the body. (hypothetically)

  27. I’ve thinking since yesterday, trying to articulate an answer. I knew nothing about him when I saw him as Thorin and I was instantly attracted by his presence, his bearing, his voice. The next day – literally – I bought Robin Hood and Guy was so beautiful, the body played an important role at this stage. And then I googled that actor and watched the Hobbit press conference, and I was mesmerized by everything: the voice, his smile, his arm, his beard, his face, I thought he was the most handsome man I ever seen, and a very decent person. I cannot dissociate his body from his presence, but the physical aspect was very important, at least in the beginning. However, the body alone does not do the job: I’m immune to Francis and even to Daniel Miller, but in the same time I can have a powerful reaction to a picture just because of a detail, a place “I would like to kiss”. For example, his empty shoulder in The Crucible poster, the little scar, a detail of his hand, a visible vein, a wrinkle, and many more. Now I see RA as a trinity: his physical aspect (body and presence), his characters, and his personality. One of them might prevail in a moment, and another one in another moment. I might say his body is not so important now, but in the beginning was his Body 

    • the power of synecdoche 🙂

      I wonder if there’s a sort of “settling in” process that goes on. I know with friends I haven’t seen in a while I’m always surprised by how they look, as if I make them over in my mind when they are absent. And then if one of his guises doesn’t move, ah well, there’s a whole sort of “relationship” in the back of it in the meantime.

  28. I summarize how I feel about the fans’ responses.
    I agree with the fact that he should not be cut into pieces, he is one, a whole. OK
    But discussing his physical attractiveness, gives water to the advertisers’ mill. I hate that one takes the fans for people dazed, open-mouthed, agape, avid for the vision of the least cm2 of the bare body of Richard Armitage. To the point of using this means to sell the least cm of cinematographic film. Sorry. I still find it hard to accept my own fan addiction.

    • We are never going to succeed in behaving in a way that won’t make people jeer.

      • Tonight I prefer to clear my head by listening to music. My latest discovery is Max Richter an absolute gem, an Arvo Part ‘s heir, a post minimalist. Good night or happy day!

        • Memoryhouse against bad/good behavior!

          • it’s fine. It’s just that being opposed to something that is a fact because it makes one look bad in the eyes of others is pointless. There is no behavior (except no behavior at all) that will please outsiders, and I think most adults are capable of withstanding advertising pressure.

  29. I keep thinking back to that magnetism when he was onstage, which made my pulse pound, made me catch my breath… contrasted with the sort of exhausted, nearly absent man at the stage door. I think for me the attraction is more in the physicality of how he inhabits a character- it somehow sharpens all the pleasing aspects of his face and body.

    • 🙂 Happy to read you, big hugs!
      On stage he is not the same person, he transcends himself to inhabit the body and the spirit of someone else. To such a point that we do not even recognize him, like in LLL.

    • great to hear from you!

      I hadn’t thought about the comparison to “the real Richard Armitage’s body” in the sense of who he is when no fan is looking at him. Great juxtaposition.

  30. I really was never one to notice bodies, I took the person as a whole. Then I must admit when RA came a long I started noticing specific body parts lol..but first the voice and eyes definitely and how he mesmerized me with his acting. It was like being captured into a whirlwind that I didn’t want to leave. I love his height and in general I have to say the whole package really does sell him. He goes up and down in his weight for roles and looks different but you still are captivated, so it is always the same voice and those eyes. For me I guess it would basically be his face. The beautiful bone structure and add that gorgeous hair I’m hooked.

    • This raises another interest problem, which is whether not only his appeal changes with weight gains / losses, but also his presence?

  31. I first saw him as Guy in the episode with Meg. I was instantly smitten by his face, eyes and voice. At first I was going to say his body doesn’t matter but when I really questioned myself, it did matter but as I wrote this comment, I went back to thinking his body doesn’t matter.
    If he lost all his hair and gained a “bunch of weight” I may not find him as attractive. I qualify it with “may” because I do end up liking some guys bald (hello Mark Strong) and I don’t mind some guys with a little extra weight (personally not attracted to very muscular or very overweight). I guess I would have to see the hairless higher weighted Armitage to know for sure if that would affect how I feel about him. I’d probably have the hardest time accepting him if his face changed. Even at that, a sexy voice can overcome a multitude of physical shortcomings. For example, I did not find Alan Rickman physically attractive but I found his voice immensely seductive. The voice made him attractive to me. So, in conclusion to a very long and not well worded comment, If his voice stays sexy, he stays sexy. His body isn’t that important.

    • hi there! way to reason yourself through this. I appreciate the Alan Rickman comparison b/c I agree, there’s a voice with a relatively average body …

  32. Zweifellos erfreue ich mich an seinem Anblick, aber das ist auch bei einigen anderen Schauspielen der Fall. (Ja, ja, das ist tatsächlich möglich.)
    Die besondere Faszination kam mit seiner Stimme und mit der Art und Weise wie er spielt. Er ist einfach unglaublich gut darin, seinen (schönen) Körper als Instrument zu nutzen, um einen Charakter darzustellen. Seine Präsenz und seine Stimme machen den Unterschied.

  33. I love to see his characters smile, specially Thorin, my favourite. And all those little movements, almost subliminal, which give depth and truth to his smile.

    • I find it somewhat amusing that many times when we see Thorin smiling, he’s in the grips of gold sickness — but it IS a beautiful smile. And yeah, his physical subtext is always interesting.

  34. What attracts me most is the face and his expressive eyes. I enjoy his body, he looks fit and strong but not overly so and I like that, but most of all it’s in the eyes, I think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: